Theorizing “Lay Theories of Media”: a Case Study of the Dissent! Network at the 2005 Gleneagles G8 Summit

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Erasmus University Digital Repository International Journal of Communication 5 (2011), 619–638 1932–8036/20110619 Theorizing “Lay Theories of Media”: A Case Study of the Dissent! Network at the 2005 Gleneagles G8 Summit PATRICK MCCURDY Erasmus University Rotterdam Drawing on “active audience studies” and recent theories of mediation, the concept of “lay theories of media” is proposed as a means to understand how social movement actors think about and interact with news media as part of the “practice” of activism. The argument is made via a case study of the Dissent! network using data gathered from participant observation in the planning and enactment of protests at the 2005 Gleneagles G8 Summit in Scotland and 30 semi-structured interviews with activists. This article argues that Dissent! activists approached Gleneagles with existing knowledge and experience about news media and demonstrates how these “lay theories” informed their activism. The conclusion stresses the utility of “lay theories” in analyzing how perceived knowledge about how the media function influences or underwrites political activism. Introduction This article is based on the premise that social movement actors have theories about how the news media work and that these “lay theories of news media” inform, influence and underwrite the practice of activism directly and indirectly. To make this argument and develop the concept of lay theories of news media, a case study is presented of a specific autonomous network—Dissent!—which planned and carried out protests at the 2005 Gleneagles G8 Summit. Specifically, this article analyzes Dissent! activists’ “lay theories of news media” and considers how such theories impact the “practice” of activism by social movement actors in an age of media saturation1. A New Media Environment Much of the early scholarship on the relationship between social movements and the media conceptualized mass media—television, radio newspapers—as the only players comprising the mass media arena. And, for a time, they were. However, the rise of information communication technologies (ICTs) Patrick McCurdy: [email protected] Date submitted: 2010–05–10 1 The author wishes to acknowledge the valuable feedback given on this article from colleagues, mentors, and the two anonymous reviewers who helped make my argument stronger and more focused. All mistakes remain my own. Copyright © 2011 (Patrick McCurdy). Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd). Available at http://ijoc.org. 620 Patrick McCurdy International Journal of Communication 5(2011) has unquestionably challenged the monopoly of power held by mass media. It has provided social movements with an alternate means for mobilization, communication and representation. The rise of ICTs has also reconfigured the contemporary media landscape, making media environmental (Silverstone, 2007). In this media environment, social movements do not opt to engage with only “old media” or use only “new media.” Instead, both tools and logics are present and inform the larger “practice” of media- oriented activism (McCurdy, 2009). Therefore, references to the news media or mass media made herein treat traditional “mass media” in their converged, digital and social form as part of a broader media environment. Mass media remain an important site of struggle. Scholars who have chronicled the rise and use of “image politics” (DeLuca, 1999) have largely focused on the actions and media strategies of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) such as Greenpeace (e.g., Anderson, 1997; Carroll & Ratner, 1999; Gaber & Willson, 2005). Although important, such organizations often have a dedicated, professionally trained staff and, in some cases, vast resources allowing the execution of complex media campaigns and events. Less academic attention has been given to the media strategies of “autonomous” or “horizontal” networks, the kind that have been active in the global justice movement (GJM).2 Despite this lack of research, the media strategies of autonomous networks are particularly interesting, as the activists involved are not salaried professionals, nor do they necessarily possess specialized training in media. While horizontal, anarchist or autonomous movements likely have a variety of “professionals” in their ranks who volunteer their time and skills, these networks also have many “amateurs.” Here amateur is meant in the original French sense of the word to describe committed individuals who follow a pursuit, often without remuneration and/or formal training. These amateurs draw on their individual and collective knowledge and experience to inform and orient their actions. Studying the media strategies of autonomous movements is also interesting because these networks do not necessarily have a formal media strategy. Instead, as was the case with Dissent!, a media policy had to be developed by its members. This feature of autonomous politics affords an interesting opportunity to consider how knowledge, or at least perceived knowledge, about how (and why) the news media function has transcended the specialized fields of media studies and media practitioners and is folded into activist knowledge and practice. Social Movements as Producers and Audiences of News Social movements have, for some time, critically analyzed the role of the dominant media institutions. Rucht (2004) offers a particularly interesting macro-level analysis of activist media strategies, from the 1968 student movement through to the global justice movement. In his assessment, Rucht (2004, p. 37) proposes the “attack” strategy as a means to account for the development of “explicit 2 This is not to argue that the GJM is comprised exclusively of such organizations, but instead is a messy pastiche of networks and organizations that has its share of “professional” entities such as international NGOs, organized labor, and political parties, as well as horizontal, anti-capitalist, and autonomist networks (Juris, 2008; Smith, 2008). International Journal of Communication 5 (2011) Theorizing “Lay Theories of Media” 621 critiques of, and even sometimes violent action against, the mass media.” Rucht focuses his analysis on broad movement strategies as opposed to activists’ individual understandings and interactions. Rucht, along with other scholars, also acknowledges that social movement actors have become savvy toward their position as “unofficial” news sources and the boundaries of, and opportunities afforded by, this status (Anderson, 1997; DeLuca 1999). Focusing on global justice activists, Juris (2008) argues convincingly that summits such as the G8 afford opportunities for ritualistic media “performances” of direct action. While insightful, Juris leaves considerable room to consider in greater detail the media practices of such activists. A call for more research into activists’ media strategies is contained in Cottle’s “How Is Media Awareness and Reflexivity Built Into the Tactics Deployed by Demonstrators and Their Subsequent Interactions With the News Media?” (2008, p. 864). Cottle’s title question is based on the assumption that media awareness and reflexivity is built into the theorization of activism. Yet a review of the literature within social movement and media studies points toward a dearth of scholarship that could articulate the reflexive awareness that social movement actors have of media. Activists’ reflexive awareness of media stems not only from their position as sources involved in the news production process, but also in their position as “active audiences” of the news. The turn toward “active audience” research acknowledges the ability of audiences to recognize, and even play with, the conventions and “seriality” of media content (Liebes & Katz, 1990, p. 143). Philo (1990) examined how audiences understand and internalize dominant representations of news. He argued that while audiences may forget the exact details of a story, they have a strong understanding of the central themes of news, an understanding that Philo attributed to the “cultural knowledge” (1990, p. 134) of audiences. While helpful, Philo’s concept of “cultural knowledge” is a theoretical black box with the processes and repertoires of understanding never explored. The concept of lay theories, as will be argued shortly, affords a means to consider how media-related knowledge informs not only the consumption of news by audiences—as in Philo’s work—but, at the same time, how such knowledge may inform or underwrite the ways that social movement actors conceptualize and present their actions to the media as news sources. Seiter (1999) is perhaps the best-known, and indeed one of only a few scholars within media and communication to explicitly use the concept of lay theories. Focusing on media consumption, Seiter (1999, pp. 58–90) presents an ethnographic study of “lay theories of news media effects” most notably held by parents and teachers on the impact of media on children. True to past active audience research, Seiter’s nuanced analysis links audience’s lay theories of news media effects with their social positions of gender and class. With the focus now on social movement actors, this article seeks to theoretically combine the position of audience member and news source and acknowledge the reflexive interaction between them through the theorization of activists’ media practices. The “Practice” of Activism and Lay Theories of

Load more